For example, the FBI unlawfully hacks into everyone's computer and catches 10,000 terrorists in doing so, causing happiness to the general population.

What kind of counter example can I give to show that government should not go against its laws for the greater good of its population?

In essence, I want to show that this maxim is not fit to become a universal law, but I can't find a good counter example

closed as unclear what you're asking by virmaior Jun 15 '16 at 14:03

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Your second and third paragraphs are fundamentally different. Also, maybe you should reword each as separate questions to ask whether kantianism or utilitarianism is fundamentally opposed to violating laws to pursue seemingly noble ends. – virmaior Jun 15 '16 at 14:05
  • It's clear what he's asking, he's asking if liberalism is logically coherent – D J Sims Jun 15 '16 at 19:35

If unlawfully hacking goes unchecked for catching 10,000 terrorists, then whatever control of power that should do the checking would be shown impotent. Therefore the heart of the issue is that we lose the ability to control such power, leaving little or nothing to prevent them from abusing it. What's to stop them from hacking into everyone's computer to maliciously obtain information, for example, about bank accounts or other private matters of law-abiding citizens?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." (Benjamin Franklin)

  • You could also cite Joseph McCarthy era Red Scare. – PV22 Jun 15 '16 at 14:38

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.